NW==now yo're just being obtuse. You are arguing that regulations will kill coal. There are two glaring holes in your logic. First, natural gas already killed coal. That's life in the market place. Second, coal was only surviving by ignoring te environmental impacts of particulate emissions, cutting the tops off of mountains and burying streams (ignoring stream protection laws), and ignoring the costs of carbon emissions. And, by the way, killing miners with unsafe practices. That was the company owned by Bush's appointee to the coal board. That's not the market--that is subsidizing uneconomic businesses with our health. Of course for every job lost in one energy form, there is a new job created in insulation, natural gas, and renewables.

Don't worry, you can ignore the facts and return to talking points. But you can't convince me you are really committed to market forces.

Mac...I am well aware that Obama has the ability under the clean air act to enact additional regulations. Just as another President could relax those regulations in the future.

Unless I misunderstand the law, the President cannot use the clean air act to force other countries, such as China, clean up their dirty energy production by placing tariffs on goods produced with that energy. That places our industries at risk. Where are the Repubs in this?

The way I see it, I can buy Chinese solar panels, produced with electricity from very dirty coal, and receive a tax credit from our government. Meanwhile, the extra costs to produce an equivalent domestic panel, using clean energy, make them too expensive.

This end run, by the President, regardless of its legality, is not sustainable politics.

KC--in context, I really thought "bleating" was pretty mild. Remember, the thread update was whether or not it was appropriate to call deniers the "flat earth society." Here NW is arguing somehow that regulation will cost coal miners jobs. The facts, which are apparently of no interest to the carbonistas, are that coal cannot compete with natural gas. But defending coal as a fuel, even ignoring the question of CO2, is a terrible idea.

Of course you have NW and NW silent on the issue of particulate emission deaths, continuing to argue against regulation that prevents health impacts. I consider a callousness towards human health pretty insulting.

Finally, lest we forget the Massey disaster, and Bush's appointment of a Massey official to a safety board:

Quote:

By Travis Waldron on Dec 8, 2011 at 12:30 pm

Federal regulators and Alpha Natural Resources this week reached an “unprecedented” settlement regarding the tragic explosion that killed 29 miners at Massey Energy’s Upper Big Branch mine outside Beckley, West Virginia in 2010, and though the deal has hardly pleased victims’ families, members of Congress were quick to pile on Massey (which was sold to Alpha Natural Resources earlier this year).

Among those members was Rep. John Kline (R-MN), the chairman of the House workforce committee, who slammed Massey’s “reckless disregard for critical worker safety protections” and for making its workers “face greater danger in an inherently hazardous profession.” But while Kline has repeatedly rebuked Massey, he and his GOP colleagues have done little to address mine safety. Congress, in fact, hasn’t passed a mine safety law since 2006, despite numerous deadly accidents since, as the GOP claims such laws will inhibit job creation — despite evidence showing that increasing mining regulation does just the opposite.

Instead, he has heaped blame on the the agency charged with enforcing mining regulations, as he did in June, when the original Massey report was issued:

“As we have said time and again, the strongest laws on the books will not protect workers if those laws are not obeyed and enforced,” he said. “We will continue to follow this ongoing investigation closely and work to ensure mine safety laws are being followed by mine operators and aggressively enforced by federal officials.”

Kline is correct in stating that even the most stringent laws won’t prevent disasters if they aren’t enforced. What he ignores in blaming regulators, however, is that years of Republican policies made federal mine regulators virtually impotent in efforts to prevent such tragedies. It was a Bush-era policy that urged the Mine Safety and Health Administration to “point out safety violations and help mine operators comply with the rules,” The Hill notes, instead of issuing safety violations and citations. Even so, MSHA issued thousands of violations and citations at Upper Big Branch before the tragedy, to no avail.

Close relationships between politicians and coal officials often prevent regulators from being effective as well. President Bush, for instance, appointed a former Massey official to an MSHA review commission in 2002, despite the company’s already-deadly record. And Bush’s MSHA chief was a former coal exec whose company had amassed injury rates at double the national average. In coal states like Kentucky, officials on the state mine safety board are former coal executives from companies with shoddy safety histories.

Mine safety legislation, meanwhile, continues to go nowhere. The latest effort, a bill introduced in April 2010, was never taken up in the Senate, likely because it couldn’t break a Republican filibuster, and failed to pass the Republican-controlled House.

It is empirically true that protecting the environment has created more jobs than it has cost--and is why we can reach our access points and sail safely. Arguing that we should ignore the costs of energy production using combustion--but not invest in the future--is short sited. Perhaps the analogy of an ostrich with its head in the sand would be more appropriate?

Mac...I am well aware that Obama has the ability under the clean air act to enact additional regulations. Just as another President could relax those regulations in the future.

Unless I misunderstand the law, the President cannot use the clean air act to force other countries, such as China, clean up their dirty energy production by placing tariffs on goods produced with that energy. That places our industries at risk. Where are the Repubs in this?

The way I see it, I can buy Chinese solar panels, produced with electricity from very dirty coal, and receive a tax credit from our government. Meanwhile, the extra costs to produce an equivalent domestic panel, using clean energy, make them too expensive.

This end run, by the President, regardless of its legality, is not sustainable politics.

CB--I suggest you read the case that I cited, which didn't merely authorize regulation of CO2 under the Clean Air Act, but virtually required it. No President can create regulations that go beyond, or far short, of Congressional direction. The reason that case succeeded is that the Bush administration, and specifically Cheney, tried to weaken the standards administratively. That's why they lost the case. There are public health and scientific information tests that trigger the requirement to regulate, and the Bush EPA lost on both grounds. Efficient or not, the rule-making process is the process established under the CAA, and it is sustainable until the two parties sit down and agree on a better approach.

I absolutely agree that the adversarial rule-making process is time consuming and relatively inefficient. Financial incentives and dis-incentives work better, and would be a better choice for regulating CO2, and lowering emissions gradually without too much economic disruption. But that option is not open, and the case requiring action was decided by the Supreme Court in 2007. Obama has to act or the matter goes back to court.

No, its a link for pricey townhouse rental in Malibu that requires a 1 year lease. I have to admit though, I'm totally missing what Bard wanted to say. "Green energy madness?" Anything for rent or sale in Malibu is going to be expensive, and there's nothing new there. I don't get it.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou cannot download files in this forum